Queen Elizabeth II told to rein in spending as she reaches final million
I'd be willing to help her figure out a few cost-cutting measures.For the first time Parliament has today produced a report into the Royal finances, following a change in the law which gives MPs oversight of how the Queen spends her (and our) money.
The report castigates the Royal Household for being profligate at a time of constrained public spending and pointedly suggests that like the rest of Government, the Queen also has to do “more for less”.
The Royal Household’s net expenditure of £33.3m was greater than the Sovereign Grant, so £2.3m had to be drawn from its £3.3m Reserve Fund, leaving a balance of only £1m at the end of the 2013 tax year. In its first report since the public grilling last year of the Queen’s Keeper of the Privy Purse, Sir Alan Reid, the PAC suggests that the Royals need to both cut their costs and increase their income. It points out that last year the Royal Household’s gas consumption rose by 14 per cent and the waste it generated by 9 per cent.
That report would be the reason that the press offices have been consolidated into one overseen by Charles at St James. Not a power play over William or stealing power from the Queen as the stupid press tried to make it into. I expect more consolidation is coming to cut costs.
This one million pounds doesn't get into their private wealth at all though right? It's public reserve funds? Or are they seriously broke?
The Queen and the Prince of Wales are extremely wealthy. I'm not sure that's true of the rest of the Royal Family.
Well, they're not going hungry; put it that way.
"Be with me always—take any form—drive me mad! only do not leave me in this abyss, where I cannot find you! Oh, God! it is unutterable! I cannot live without my life! I cannot live without my soul!"
Phillip used to keep a close eye on economy. Maybe he is now too old to keep his grip on the privy purse.
Doesn't the state have an obligation to do basic maintenance on these historic residences/buildings/archives to assure that they aren't falling apart?
This is the history of the nation we are talking about.
I don't know how I feel about the Queen having to turn herself/her homes/family into "tourist attractions" to "justify" their existence.
The statement on the Royal Family's website is a bit confusing:
http://www.royal.gov.uk/TheRoyalHous...yalFamily.aspxIn 2000, the annual amounts payable to members of the Royal Family (which are set every ten years), were reset at their 1990 levels for the next ten years. Apart from an increase of £45,000 on the occasion of The Earl of Wessex’s marriage, amounts remain as follows, provided by The Queen:
The Duke of York (£249,000 per annum)
The Earl of Wessex (£141,000 per annum)
The Princess Royal (£228,000 per annum)
The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester (£175,000 per annum)
The Duke and Duchess of Kent (£236,000 per annum)
Princess Alexandra (£225,000 per annum).
That's not chump change, but it is a sign that an additional £200,000 a year or so makes a significant difference to their standard of living, something that I don't believe is true of HMQ or the her eldest son.
The White House is both a home, an office and a tourist attraction. It's a huge palace, I'm sure they have room to do all three.
I'm sure this take on WWI is not news to many people who read this thread, but I found this to be an interesting read.
"Puccini cries out for spirals, but really good ones." ~ Dick Button, 1998 Worlds
Congrats to Princess Madeleine of Sweden and her husband Chris on the birth of a healthy baby girl yesterday!
How are the amounts determined that the Queen provides?
Any idea why the Princess Royal gets 228K pounds/year, while her brother the Duke of York gets 249K pounds/year? I was under the impression that Anne did a tremendous number of appearances on behalf of the royal family each year. And Princess Alexandra (who is 75 or so?) gets 225K pounds/year. Confusing.
Rex! Welcome back! I thought of you three times last week: first when I saw some Miracle Whip at the store, then when I drove by a Burger King, and then when I saw a photo of Boy George. Glad you're back.
Hi Heckles. You are still a mess .
Please tell me that is NOT Boy George!!!
A good rant is cathartic. Ranting is what keeps me sane. They always come from a different place. Take the prime minister, for example. Sometimes when I rant about him, I am angry; other times, I am just severely annoyed - it's an important distinction. - Rick Mercer
Coco, the link you put up isn't formatted properly or my iPad isn't seeing it if it is. I always feel King George V was in a very tight spot when it came to the Tsar and Family. Yes, they were close cousins, but if brought to Britain, could have been the spark of revoultion due to harbouring a ruler who could care less about his people. Sad he had no choice in the end to refuse the original offer of rescue and safe exile, but there never are any easy ones in a situation like this.
Happy Birthday to the cutest lil Royal out there!! Estelle always comes across as a little one filled w/such joy. May she be blessed w/a little playmate soon.
Speaking of that...Congratulations to Princess Madeleine and Chris O'Neill on the birth of their Baby Girl!! Anyone see Chris' Press Conference Saturday? I only saw pictures, but after they'd marked the little one's footprints on the Birth Certificate, they then marked Chris' forearms w/them. He was showing them off.
Prince Jaime and Princess Viktoria of Bourbon-Parma also welcomed their first child on the weekend, also a healthy baby girl.
Busy weekend for the Royal Stork!!